Liberal and Conservative Christianity, the same book, a different binding, and why I , as a Catholic radfem, refuse to sit by while “liberals” perpetuate the very systems which oppress me, spiritually, because I’m female.

I have recently been party to conversations with progressive Christians into the nature and acceptance of the transgender/transexual movement.

The general consensus is of acceptance(rightly) of transgender individuals
As equally made by God and ergo equally deserving of our love and acceptance.
And on an individual, person to person basis, this is not only the right thing to do as Christians, it is the only thing to do.
This, however, has lead to a blind acceptance of much of the politics involved in the transgender movement, with no analysis of the veracity of stated”scientific basis” for said, or discernment regarding the actual consequences for females and women’s liberation within Christianity and it’s home, the church.

There is NO scientific of neurological basis for transsexuality or transgenderism. Because of this, major institutions such as Johns Hopkins no longer carry out sex reassignment surgery. If we were to view gender dysphoria the way they, and many psychiatrists do, we would either conclude that we stop amputating perfectly normal body parts, or that we provide people with body dysmorphias and eating disorders gastric bypasses etcetera , since it is considered to be the same psychological fault in though process and perception that causes both, as the chief psychiatrist of Johns Hopkins has stated.

Now, this doesn’t mean I don’t sympathise with their plight, or would prevent anyone from living as they please, as long as they’re not harming others….but there is movement to reify identity over reality to the extent that a person(most always male) will “identify” as a woman and no further proof of this will be required(they can for instance, for all intents and purposes carry on living as men) for them to be given unfettered access to many female only facilities and sports.
Never mind the ones who have not had SRS and have, do, and will continue to use this for nefarious purposes which have included rape.

Never mind that the physiological differences inherent in having a Y chromosome and a male childhood and puberty (not to mention a lifetime of male socialisation) offer a huge, and potentially DEADLY advantage over actual females in sport (Fallon Fox .. Who transitioned at nearly 40 and lied about their birth sex until exposed, and caused life threatening injuries to Tamikka Brents).

Never mind any of that. If a male identifies as a woman or girl, we must immediately capitulate , regardless of the consequences for our daughters, and indeed, transsexuals with no intent but to live a quiet life.
But our female children, our sisters in god, are not collateral damage in a frankly , toxic politics.
And I wonder, if female to male transsexuals posed the same danger to our sons and brothers, if there’d be such a blind acceptance or their “identity” over reality , in the name of “liberalism”?
Which if it harms our very children, I’d posit , is no such thing at all?

If women are to take their place as the equals of males, under god, we cannot sit by and allow people to continue to perpetuate society imposed gender roles by imagining they’re the opposite sex(boys who like feminine thing MUST be actually girls right?)….
This not only pathologises behavioural traits not intrinsically linked to, but rather extrinsically socialised onto, by sex.
(It also pathologises the signs of possible homosexuality … And forces sex changes..such as in Iran..hardly progressive huh?)
This is the refusal to separate of sex form gender.
Only a biological gender essentialist would say that only certain sexes can have certain behavioural traits.

The very argument used by many against female clergy….
Hardly progressive, unless being progressive means labelling the likes of Rabbi Julia Neuberger, or any prospective female episcopalian bishop “actually male”.
Gender roles, especially when perpetuated by males aping the socialisation of females, harm women.
In essence, would we tell a female wishing to enter the priesthood that she is either delusional, or that she must “actually” be transgender, and ergo must live as a man , before she can attend seminary ?
Because that’s what the biological gender essentialism behind both transgenderism and conservatism, equally, tells us.
And let me tell you, as a Roman Catholic who’s suffered a great deal spiritually at the hands of such philosophy, it is neither liberal OR progressive.

And if looking at 55% of the human race, and the humanly imposed roles and behaviours, always subordinate and always submissive to those of the other 45% , and saying “this is as god intended” (and ergo reasoning that those outside those roles must belong to the other group, based purely on our societal mores and their feelings)… Is “logical”….then what does that imply vis-a-vis the teaching that God made us all equal in his sight?
Where does the perpetuation of false inequalities(even by people who volunteer into this)fit in Christianity?

I know I’m female, I accept my female anatomy. The rest is all falsities, man made, for the benefit of men. And while I will always treat all people as god intended, as equal human beings, what sort of Christian would I be if I perpetuated structural inequality through a reification of the nebulous, because a male desires it, for his comfort?

In short, many progressive Christians, through a false liberalism, have fallen into the exact same tropes, and trap, as their scorned conservative brethren.
It is the same message, in a different binding.

50.789517-1.130659

Advertisements

Share this:

Like this:

Related

Post navigation

6 thoughts on “Liberal and Conservative Christianity, the same book, a different binding, and why I , as a Catholic radfem, refuse to sit by while “liberals” perpetuate the very systems which oppress me, spiritually, because I’m female.”

I totally get where you are coming from. I am a progressive Lutheran (sometimes known as Catholic Lite:)) Last year I went to Reconciling Works (Lutherans LGBT group) workshop on building a more inclusive church. The speakers were a gay man and a trans woman. The gay man stuck to the agenda of the meeting. The trans woman went into a long sob-strewn saga on how awful “her” life had been that just went on and on. We were all squirming. Out of this we realize that part of “her” oppression had been having a tenured position in the hard sciences and not coming out as trans until one year before retirement. How, uh, convenient for you, sweetheart. I guess you had no idea that women of your generation had a terrible time even getting admitted into grad and PhD programs in the sciences, much less fellowships, jobs, and tenure? And when they did, they were subjected to continual harassment? But it doesn’t end there. When “she” found out I was a lesbian, “she” gave me this pervy look and asked me what intimacy between women was really like. So this is what an inclusive church looks like? No thanks.

Well, I’m in agreement with only one tenet of Catholicism regarding transsexuality, and that’s this, that god gave you a perfectly fine body, and outside medical issues everything else is to an extent egotistical, and that any amputation for non clinical reasons is mutilation of god’s gift.
Where I split from the church is the tenet of biology being role, (that ol’ biological essentialism trope) and even the church is seeming schizoid on this given it’s support of females in every field save the priesthood.
As an ex member of the armed forces, and in many other ways, I find myself even rejecting of the term “gender non-conforming” as this in itself elides to gender essentialism, which is every bit as toxic as biological essentialism.
Sex exists, as does (what we label phenotypically) race, and all else is entirely the creation of hierarchies such as patriarchy and white supremacy.
We, rightly, reject the notion that a person’s calling and role is dictated by their melanin quotient, and the same should apply to chromosomes.
We all know black people cannot “become” white, and black people, quite rightly, have held it not necessary to ape or “identify” as white people, they have refused colonisation in either direction.
Women who accept , even encourage , this aping and identifying aren’t “bending” gender, they’re reifying it, every bit as much as patriarchy does.

And whatever, they’re decided, pre birth, on a cellular level.
Nobody said that was neither random or anything BUT arbitrary , so take that straw man proposition and learn critical thought that goes beyond relying on logical fallacies.